Explain away a whole town of highly educated and literate witnesses
Easy, i already did. Didn't you read my comments you are supposedly responding to?
Flying craft (assuming that is what it was, and not some sort of meteorological or astronomical phenomena) does NOT equal "aliens". That false conflation is the psyop!
Mirror events in India's histories as well.
The vimanas are flying craft. Once again, did you even read my comments before you responded to them?
They've been here since long before us.
Don't misunderstand me. There are MANY forms of life on earth and it is not fundamentally impossible that some of them (currently and historically unknown, of course) also build flying craft. It's just that we have no evidence for them. It is fine to believe in things we have no evidence for, but you must always remember that it is merely a belief!
The only creature in the known universe that builds flying craft is us, and "aliens" only exist in modern fiction (furthermore they require "space" to come from, which didn't exist until modern times either).
Wow - a google search is not just a refutation, but dozens of them?!
Why don't YOU try refuting something i said instead. Using words.
Don't you know anything yourself?
I know you believe that aliens are real and have existed throughout the ages, and have a google search that (ostensibly) supports your preexisting bias. But without any research/evidence/facts of your own to support that (tv based) belief, that's all it is or will/can ever be.
Report yourself to your hearts content - you little tattle tale you.
You’re an admitted
Stop listening to the voices in your head. They're not your friends.
answering any questions
I answer most all earnest questions. If you ever have one, let me know. Reminder: Rhetorical gish gallop copypasta is not an earnest question; it's spam (and a waste of time).
your claimed beliefs
Name even one of my "claimed beliefs", and be sure to quote/link/cite my claim. I won't hold my breath.
Reported for spam
Wasting the mods' time is not a good idea. Best case, they'll ignore all reports from you for crying wolf - again. Worst case, they'll ban you - again.
A more apt analogy would be :
"One magic bullet killed kennedy and then went through the chest, wrist, and leg of the man sitting in front of him."
Some people, like yourself, simply believe such things because the government told them to.
Others, including the forensic experts at the time, are more skeptical.
It's your fact-less opinion
I see that you desperately want/need that to be the case, but my conclusions are based on years of research. I cut my teeth in ufology, and studied the scourge of alien worship (and the psyop that encourages it) first hand.
millions of sightings across the entire breadth of our existence
Sightings of unidentified flying craft (and sometimes meteorological/astronomical phenomena) - yes. Aliens are a purely modern fiction. They do not exist in reality outside of fiction in any era - and do not even exist in fiction before the modern one. Aliens come from "space", and space doesn't exist back then - it really is as simple as that.
Are you a flat earther too?
No, but if i were it wouldn't automatically make what i'm saying incorrect - as much as you need it to :(
I understand i am insulting/attacking your (tv based) religion, but i have your best interest at heart.
If you think 'aliens' are a psyop
I don't just think it, i know it.
In fact, the modern gray we know and love wasn't invented until the early 1990's.
Aliens are entirely fictional, and exclusively modern.
UFO's are clandestine flying craft built and flown by the only creature in the known universe that builds such things. Aliens ("little green men", originally) have been falsely conflated with flying saucers since their first appearance in the 40's to discredit anyone researching, witnessing, or reporting/publicly discussing the subject.
A psyop that has spanned history across thousands of years? Across multiple continents?
No. Aliens do not and cannot exist before the "space age". Angels can come from heaven in earlier christian mythology and such things - but no aliens.
As for "thousands of years / multiple continents", it is true there is good evidence for flying craft existing on those continents and over that period of time. Flying craft does NOT equal aliens - that is the (modern) psyop.
Explain the Sirius tribe.
Most likely simply a hoax. Less likely, they had telescopes in the distant past (and/or the star cluster they worshipped was more visible back then) and devolved to the state we found them in where they were worshipping remnants of their lost culture.
I was there for the mass sighting in in Illinois
Very cool. I would love to see one. Again, the crafts are real. They are real flying machines first designed and flown around the 40's. There is only one creature in the known universe which builds such craft. Alien worship is a scourge, and an encouraged psyop to suppress the reality of the craft.
Our cosmos is a vastly large place.
And what if it weren't? Our estimates as to the size of the universe are simply wild guesses. Let's say, for the point of discussion, that those estimates are cosmically wrong and the universe is much smaller than we want it to be. Would that change your conclusions/estimates?
Because that's nearly the same as destroying a civilization. We're not ready.
And why on earth would they care about that? Especially if they desire the material goods/resources here. The prime directive is television fiction, and an allegory for how the military treats civilization.
This is despicable.
Thanks for posting it. Is any news source (mainstream or otherwise) reporting on this atrocity?
I certainly haven't seen anything...
EVERYTHING IS SUBJECTIVE THEREFORE
Our experiences are all subjective, yes.
However this is one of the rare points which tallestshil makes which is correct : objective truth exists (although that truth is almost exclusively not within our grasp). Manifest objective reality exists and is the basis of all science. Science would not work if that objective reality were not objective.
Furthermore, to accept the tenets of simulationism/existentialism/nihilism is the height of modern sophistry and the underpinning of the dogma of moral relativism found in post modernism. "I can do whatever i want because nothing is true/objective, and therefore nothing matters"
Of course, tallestshil mutters this truth while out of the other side of his "mouth" spewing proud religious fundamentalist delusion about how he alone always "proves truth" and no other views could possibly be correct because they "have spoken".
Said the person with an earnest interest in the subject of flat earth, which you are too cowardly/afraid to legitimately research or discuss - even for a minute.
Your unshakable faith in your worldview as well as reflexive and blind attacking of any heretic with a differing view is commonplace for religious zealots like yourself (assuming you are human - a devastatingly sad possibility)
paid shill.
Still accusing others of the crimes you yourself are guilty of, eh? Familiar tactic...
I often hope they are a bot/shill, for their sake. The alternative is far too sad :(
Belligerently ignorant, dishonest, AND unable to read or respond earnestly :( It's a powerfully terrible combination.
I did read your previous comment.
Then you didn't understand it. The example you used was essentially exactly the same as the one i did. That kind of wonton parroting can never be conversation.
You said I chose to feel disrespected instead of feeling nothing
Correct, which you admitted both verbally - and more importantly - through your actions. You haven't said one novel or worthwhile thing since a minor comment 20+ comments ago. You are positively obsessed and quite obviously offended. Otherwise such a minor comment would not and could not ever illicit such a "response". You could have just ignored such a quip and stayed on topic - but you let your emotions get the better of you. Don't be upset, don't be ashamed; just try to do better next time.
You have no chance of being honest with anyone else if you can't first be honest with yourself. There is no shame in being offended - cast off your pride. There is shame in allowing that offense to consume you and that emotion to make conversation impossible - but before you can do any better you have to recognize and admit your mistakes (to yourself!)
There is a clear and distinct benefit
No, there isn't. Just like repeating yourself over and over again to attempt to troll someone has no benefits.
This is the superior medium. Engage in productive conversation here if you can or be silent. Though you'll have to do that with someone else, because you have wasted too much of my time and i've given you too many chances to do better. Pride is a fool's fortress and shame's cloak, cast it off if you can.
I can observe that he is making an attempt to insult/disrespect me
Please read my previous comment if you're able. This specific example was explicitly referenced. You seem to have missed it. Bot detection +1.
You've seem to still to misunderstand my point.
No. But you are ignoring mine. There is no reason or benefit in switching mediums. If you are able, abandon this endless parroting and either engage in productive conversation (if you can) or be silent.
I would love to not have to repeat myself!
Then stop. It's up to you. I am going to block you for trolling if you make the wrong choice again.
Speaking of repeating one's self
The difference is that i don't ONLY repeat myself over and over again ad nauseaum while being asked to stop. Engage in productive conversation if you can, or be silent.
when I am attempting to have an honest conversation with them.
You need to "attempt" harder. You were failing then, and failing even more miserably now - having not even "attempted" for around 20+ comments.
Repeating yourself over and over while ignoring the other person is not and cannot be conversation - but it is something a bot can do ;) Bot detection +1
Not necessarily
Yes necessarily. Disrespect is necessarily a type of offense.
You could have recognized such attempted disrespect and chose to feel nothing - but you didn't. You felt disrespected - which is to say you felt offended and have both admitted and acted like it from that point on.
If only you were as coldly logical and emotionally detached as your pride is making you pretend to appear; we could have skipped all of this nonsense waste of time. You could have, and would have, ignored all irrelevant comments which had nothing to do with the topic of discussion.
My point is it would be easier for you to determine
Your point is irrelevant/moot. If you cannot avoid bot like tendencies and engage in productive conversation here, then you can't do it anywhere else or in any other medium for the same reasons.
To suggest that reality is not reality
I'm suggesting that your guess as to wether or not i am a human (based largely on my claim that i am, and your gullible belief in those unvalidated claims) MAY be (and in this case happens to be) correct, but is certainly not reality. It is a guess. Forgetting that, as well as the possibility that i may have been a bot in the past or will become one in the future is foolish.
My actions are not intended to frustrate
You cannot hope to be honest with anyone else if you cannot first be honest with yourself. You have done nothing but repeat yourself for damn near 20 comments while repeatedly being asked to stop. If you aren't intending to frustrate, then you aren't aware enough of your conversational actions to hold a conversation with a human.
I don't think productive conversation is possible
Then be silent. For the love of god, be silent.
if you continue to insist that my status as a human is under question
It is, it always was in previous interactions, and it always will be in the future. This is true for all interactions online and the reason for all bot detection that exists. If you don't like being accused and/or compared to the actions of bots - my advice is to quit the internet 10-20 years ago.
The very reason I have to tell you
Is because you're offended (disrespected IS offended, you silly billy) :( If you weren't you could drop all of this and would have moved on a dozen or so duplicate comments ago.
I understand your argument
It isn't an argument, it's just my perspective and the reality.
I am refuting it with a counter
You can't refute someone else's perspective or reality. Even if you could, it would all be moot because if you can't avoid bot like tendencies here - you can't do it anywhere else for the same reasons.
If you can avoid these bad habits, and abandon your parroting loop - then for god's sake do it. Otherwise, be silent.
The evidence is clear, that you are 100% a human being
I don't disagree that there is some evidence that i am a human being - at least some of the time. It is more the "100%" certainty that is so foolish, as well as believing what is said without rigorous validation (in any context). There is (and you should be aware of) always the non zero percent chance that any online entity is/was (or may become) a bot (yes, including audio and video chat too).
Understandable that you might be frustrated
Then stop it. If you know that you are frustrating and are NOT a troll (which actively seek to frustrate), then simply stop. Get back on a meaningful topic and engage in productive conversation - if you can - otherwise, be silent.
And I'm telling you you are mistaken
Don't tell me. Show me, through your actions.
Of course there is
I've already explained my position on this thoroughly. If you don't want to understand it, or the reasoning behind it (which i've also shared, thoroughly) - then i can't (and wouldn't, if i could!) force you.
I would say it's foolish at this point to even consider the idea that you might be a bot
If only that were the case :( We are well and truly "through the looking glass" now. It is foolish to not consider any online entity potentially a bot - even one that was previously a human.
You say here that you are a human
I do. Bots can (and do) too :(
so then why on earth would it be considered foolish for me to say that I am certain you are human
Because blindly believing the voices you encounter - wether online or in real life - is foolish.
You insult me just for the sake of insulting me?
Certainly not. I fully and sincerely apologize for any offense or insult you have interpreted/received from my words; i know you may find this hard to believe, but it is not my intention.
I work very hard (though admittedly do still fail) to only ever attack the thought and never the thinker (aka: avoid ad hominem). Foolish, stupid, genius - these are aspects of humanity, not archetypes. When i call an idea or action of yours stupid or foolish (or vice versa) that does not mean i am attacking you or saying that i do not also have foolish and stupid ideas/actions. When i say you are foolish for believing i could not be a bot, i am not painting you as an archetypal fool incapable of any better or otherwise a fool in every regard - i am saying that that specific view is foolish.
I make a correct evaluation of the person you are
Things are not always as they seem. It is true that i am a human, and that you are correct in that (though bots can claim the same). It is not true that i was intending to disrespect you at any point during this discussion - but i fully understand (and even earnestly apologize for) why and how it was received that way by you. Things are not always as they appear to us - even though that subjective reality we experienced was!
It seems you are just trying to be confrontational.
Not intentionally no. Perhaps naturally, and out of frustration.
Hi there, audience here
Well color me surprised! Welcome to, and apologies for, the rathole!
While you're here anyhow, i hope it will prove useful to have a somewhat objective third party's perspective on said rathole.
Never have I seen two participants agree so vociferously that they're wasting breath
As far as i recall, i am the only one who has been doing that (though the question "god, why?!" frequently comes to mind). This other "participant" does not express that view, and acts pretty consistently contrary to it.
If they agreed that their responses were a waste of breath, i certainly missed that interaction!
unwilling to budge even an inch to resolve that situation!
I disagree. I've extended earnest apologies for unintended offense several times, and have been earnestly trying to resolve the situation. The only "inch" i will not budge on is to take responsibility for their (re)actions. I acknowledge that by telling them they were/are acting in a bot like manner that i upset them, caused them to feel disrespected, and contributed to their abandonment of the conversation writ large - and although i do and have apologized for any unintended offense, i cannot take responsibility for their actions. To do so would only ensure such childish habits in the future, and be disearnest placation.
venturing nothing, yielding nothing,
I'm open to suggestions! I cannot and would not force the horse to earnestly converse - though i can stupidly continue to try and lead them towards it. Repeating the same action and hoping for a different outcome :(
but now you're being dull.
I could not agree more. I probably should have just blocked them when i said i would. Pity and hope got the better of me - perhaps with a little prostration/attempted restitution mixed in.
They have made it very clear that they have no want or interest in continuing any earnest or productive conversation - even if they should happen to be capable of it. So be it.
It's obviously rude to insinuate someone might be a bot, and hiding behind the distinction between "declaring" someone a bot or "using verbiage like 'likely'" is even ruder
I can certainly understand this view, but i don't agree with it personally. As i said to modeler - perhaps i have become callous to such accusations having been online for so long, but i can't help but feel like such callous is a good and necessary thing to have. I am from the "sticks and stones" generation, after all.
From my perspective, there is no rudeness intended by any captcha or other bot detection method - including my own. Telling them that they are exhibiting bot like tendencies which are preventing meaningful discussion was not intended to be rude or to offend - but so such tendencies could (hopefully) be avoided so that productive conversation could continue. Although it certainly can be received as rude, such minor rudeness (even major rudeness, in my view) must be able to be overcome/overlooked if productive conversation (rational discourse) is your aim. It is a necessary conversational skill.
I expressed an earnest concern and evaluation that they were appearing more likely a bot through exhibiting these behaviors (repeatedly, to boot).
That rhetorical habit of yours
What rhetorical habit? Being rude? I don't think i have a habit of that - rhetorical or otherwise. Though, as i said - i can certainly see how i was received that way and understand why in this context.
Leave that shit for the ragers and trolls
In general, i agree that some of my interactions here have been more "troll handling" than i would prefer - but it was difficult to feel that there wasn't a willful troll on the other side considering their absolute steadfast refusal to get back on any topic, and utter devotion to continuing this endless "aside" ad nauseaum despite repeated pleas to the contrary. Top that with a barrage of baseless "you're a liar (but i won't quote/cite how or when)" "cherries" and you have yourself a troll sundae :(
that you yourself are guilty of
That's because they are mirroring me (another bot tendency, by the by). Even the specific verbiage used is lifted. However, i don't shy away from admitting mistake or quoting/citing specifically (within reason). As for being a semantic pedant - guilty as charged, but i do try not to be needlessly pedantic.
And if you find gratification in lines of discussion like these
Not at all. My finger hovers above the block button even now. I am not completely convinced they are not a bot or have not been a bot at previous times in this discussion - however, for my part - i don't much care if they are or not. If they can avoid the conversational habits that bots engage in and otherwise hold earnest rational discourse - i'm happy to engage if for nothing else than the ordering (and/or refining) of my own thoughts.
The other impetus to continue discussion is the off chance that it is as you say - as it sometimes appears in communication with them - that they have an earnest interest in the subject/discussions and my demeanor and/or approach has pushed them away from it into this mindlessly repetitive and reflexively contrarian death spiral. I certainly don't want that to be the case, and am happy to make any amends i can to remedy that (possible in this forum).
But it sounds like you don't, so instead can y'all please drop these irrelevant back-and-forths and get back to the interesting stuff, like satellites and accelerometers or whatever?
God, i've been saying that dozens of ways since this whole rathole began - it is my sincere hope that modeler responds differently to your plea than to the dozens of mine.
Thanks for chiming in!
Calling out your repeated disrespect is not the same as being offended.
No one said it was. I said you were acting offended, and that you should stop if you can. A good way towards demonstrating your "lack of offense" would be to abandon this utter waste of time and get back on a topic of productive conversation - if you can.
You are free to feel disrespected any time you wish, but that was never my intention or action.
instead of addressing points directly
What points have i not addressed directly? Name one. I'll wait.
You haven't made ANY relevant points to respond to in somewhere around 20 comments because you've been too busy expressing how "offended" (which necessarily includes "disrespected", by the by) you are ad nauseaum.
it's best we move to a medium where we can be more confident
If you had read and understood my previous repeated responses to this incessant request, you would already understand why there isn't such a medium, why such a medium will never exist, and why even if such a medium could and did exist - it wouldn't matter because you still demonstrably lack the ability to have a productive conversation :( Feel free to demonstrate me wrong by engaging in productive conversation instead of this endless pity party.
I know with 100% certainty that you are a human being that I have been interacting with.
Then you are foolish. Nothing i've said couldn't be accomplished by a bot or bot/human (hybrid) team.
Then let's have one in a medium
This is the superior medium. Demonstrate that you are capable here, or be silent.
Every human, by default, including me, passes the Turing test because their behavior is, inherently, human.
And yet, you still failed it and appeared as bot-like to a human evaluating you. What does this teach you about the turing test (besides that it can obviously be used on you - a purported human)?
I have, a number of times, quoted you directly.
Yes, and just like the latest time - i have responded, refuted, and discarded your baseless accusations without any further contest from you. If you feel you still have further contest to levy on one of the previously addressed "lies" you erroneously claimed, please point out which one, or be silent.
I'm not offended,
Then stop acting like it! Get back on a meaningful topic and engage in productive conversation if you're able, or be silent.
I just sense your disrespect.
You make a lousy psychic. If you sense anything, it is annoyance at your proud and steadfast wasting of my time (speaking of "sensing disrespect"). The major difference is i don't care if you respect me or not. You should try it, if you can.
as a way of discrediting me/my points
First it was "as a way of derailing the conversation" (which only you have done and continue to do) and now it's to discredit you/your points?! Which is it?
You are really grasping at straws here. There is no audience to discredit you to! It's just us talking here (or, if you are a bot - just me). I don't think you've thought this through.
With all due respect, if you have valid points - get the f*ck on with them. This entire red herring of a tangent is your tactic (conscious or not) to avoid discussing any points whatsoever. The fact that i've allowed you to do so for SO long now demonstrates a, frankly, unwarranted abundance of respect for the conversation and for you (of course with the assumption you aren't a bot, and are capable of and interested in productive conversation)
We do not agree on this.
Really? In this scenario, on this site, in this conversation, you think there is a way to be 100% certain that you (or any online entity) is a bot? Again, i don't think you've thought this through - but i would be happy for you to demonstrate me wrong on this. No suggestions involving leaving the site are permissible, only use of this site, this conversation, and our words (aka "the scenario").
Then the most logical solution would be to move to a medium
This is the superior medium. If you can't conduct a meaningful conversation in this format (which necessarily involves avoiding bot like behavior), then you can't do it anywhere else.
In any case, as i've said repeatedly (and yet you still fail to grasp - bot detection +1) even if another online medium proved you weren't a bot (which it can't) - it would only establish you weren't a bot in that particular interaction - not in previous or future ones. It would be the "captcha" in the analogy, that once passed could not guarantee that a bot was not there previously and/or swapped in right afterwards.
I don't care if you are a bot or not. I only care for productive conversation - earnest rational discourse. If you are capable of that, then do it. Otherwise be silent.
Again, no
Try not acting like a child, if you can help it. The turing test can be applied to any entity purporting to be / presenting as human. I agree it is not its intended purpose, but your view that it CAN'T be is both silly and wrong. What on earth do you think would prevent you from applying it to a person?
Assuming you are a human, the turing test has already been applied to you - and you have failed.
Again, I have already done that
No, there are no accusations of lies that you provided which contain links/citations/quotes of mine which were not already addressed, refuted, and you did not contest the refutations of. If i am in error, please link to the one you have in mind.
I don't feel disrespected by that though.
Good. When you are accused of being a bot, either through captcha or any other bot detection method - there is no reason or use in being offended at the accusation.
is repeatedly declaring that I must be a bot when I'm attempting to have an honest discussion.
Please cite/quote this declaration. You seem to be seeing/reading things that aren't there, and are being needlessly sensitive. I tend to use verbiage like "likely" and "bot like". As we agree, it is somewhere between extremely difficult and impossible to determine with absolute certainty (in this scenario, anyhow) that you (or I) are a bot - so declarations to that effect would be silly.
They do not.
Bot detection is bot detection - no matter the method, and no matter wether the determination made by that detection method is correct or not. For example - humans fail captchas all the time and that necessarily increases the chances that they are a bot (from the bot detector's perspective) You have exhibited many bot like tendencies which continues to increase the chance that you are one. No need to take any offense at it. Just stop exhibiting those behaviors as best you can.
Incorrect
Don't act like a child if you can help it. Obviously a person can be tested with such a turing test, and you are in this scenario (and others).
I have already done that.
Yes, and like the last baseless accusation i have refuted and dismissed them without contest from you. That means you agree that i have not been dishonest, and are simply pissy about it :( Unless you can quote/cite a particular "lie" that i have not already refuted and dismissed, you should stop lying about "my dishonesty" - as this is another common troll/shill/bot tactic.
Other people are much more respectful.
You are free to feel disrespected anytime you encounter a captcha or any other bot detection method online. But it's foolish. No disrespect is intended - either by those captchas or by me.
That's not what this is.
That's where you are wrong. Bot detection is bot detection. Mine is a bit more sophisticated, but they have an almost identical purpose.
Unless I were human, then the Turing test wouldn't apply.
The turing test would apply to anything being tested with it, obviously. Though i agree that, if you are human, whatever its results - they certainly couldn't establish that you are a machine.
But your dishonesty is an example of your dishonesty.
But your last accusation of dishonesty was literally an example of your difficulty inferring an answer. Can you provide (quote/cite/link) any actual examples of "my dishonesty" or were you just spewing purely hypothetical tautology?
Spot on.
"A generation of gullible fools believing they could buy enlightenment for 3 dollars a hit." - Hunter Thompson (paraphrased)
Thread limit reached again :( Very tiresome, and boring.
if my state of even being human is in question
It always was before, and it always will be in the foreseeable future. Better quit the internet.
Captchas and other bot detections will continue to exist and be levied against you because the very real possibility that you are a bot exists. It's just something we have to live with. No sense in pouting about it.
I'm offering to settle that over a better medium.
You just can't read, can you :( There is no "human authentication" medium - nor one that is inherently better. Besides (as i've said several times now), if you can't avoid bot like tendencies (including the inability to read and comprehend) and conduct meaningful conversation in this medium - there is no hope or point in any others.
You seem to imply though that if you were to converse with an AI over video chat, it would pass the Turing test.
You've already failed the turing test here.. Which means you will necessarily fail there too.
Will you exhibit bot like tendencies over another medium?; of course - and for the same reasons you do on this one regardless of if you are a bot or not.
Please stop being dishonest
Your inability to infer implicit answers (another complex function bots cannot perform) is not an example of my dishonesty.
It's not making you look good here.
I don't care what i look like.
Still avoiding the question
Still avoiding the topic and productive conversation like a troll/bot. As i said, i will consider answering the question (though i've already answered it implicitly) if you can do that.
Not just possible, actual and factual!
As i said, that is not fundamentally impossible. Of course, there is no evidence to support it.
Correct. Because aliens only exist in modern fiction! It can't be elves from the lord of the rings either, for the exact same reasons.
Fictional things can't build or fly anything in reality. It is completely impossible, unlike the possibility that some cryptid (or even already known non-human lifeform) is responsible - which is merely preposterous/ridiculous (and evidenceless)